World Premiere/Advance screening discussions [SPOILERS GUARANTEED]
- Thread starter M'Sharak
- Start date
Not necessarily. Its Star Trek...and in Star Trek Mirror universe are possible and you can return from them, and you can also jump between multiple realities ("Paralells" anyone?).
Anything is possible.
Lost interest, there. Your taste and judgment are so far different from mine that I can't relate to your POV. OldBSG was about ten percent inspired and ninety percent crap.
Well, because it's a difference which makes no difference other than to mollify the relatively small number of long-time fans who are uncomfortable without an explanation for why everything has changed.
We've got oldTrek and nuTrek now.
There's a reference to the Farragut in this film? Where? What other references to tv episodes/movies are there?
Also, according to the film, time travel into the past creates alternate realities. By that reckoning, the events of First Contact and the Temporal Cold War in Enterprise must have created divergent universes distinct from the original as well.
Also, according to the film, time travel into the past creates alternate realities. By that reckoning, the events of First Contact and the Temporal Cold War in Enterprise must have created divergent universes distinct from the original as well.
So, no Amok Time. And now, no Journey to Babel, either. Oh well.
Uh yes. They still happened in the original and seperate timeline WHICH STILL EXISTS. (I don't understand what part of that is too hard to grasp.)
We understand that it still exists. The point is that for all intents and purposes, it's dead. There will never be another story told in that timeline. It's over and done with, relegated to fanfic and novels. While it still exists, it does only as a memory of what once was.
It's been replaced. It may not have been replaced "in universe," but it's been replaced to us, the real people who are entertained by it. Everybody has been so excited about this new film because it was bringing Star Trek back! It was giving us new stories, something new to see, that we hadn't seen before. It was something beyond just rewatching the same episodes and films for the 20th time. That can't happen anymore for the Trek we all remember, but only for this "nuTrek," as some have dubbed it.
Let me put it this way, if I may. We have all had a friend for decades. We got to spend time with him 700 times over the years, making new memories. In between visits, we still had the memories of times spent together. There was always the hope of seeing him again, too, but it diminished as time went on. Then in 2009, we heard that our old friend was stopping by to make new memories with us, and we were all excited. In the end, it turned out that our old friend didn't come back. Instead, he sent someone that was very similar to him. We can now spend time with this person, and get to know him and have some fun and make new memories - but we'll never get to see that old friend again, and we have only memories.
For some of us, this is deeply saddening, and for some of us, we're so hurt by this new fellow who's trying to be our friend but just isn't, that we don't want much to do with him. It would be one thing if he came along as the different person that he is and we liked him. It's another entirely for him to try to duplicate that old friend we once knew.
Something can be a classic and yet have been pretty bad. Like I said, it's all how you define classic.
So, no Amok Time. And now, no Journey to Babel, either. Oh well.
Uh yes. They still happened in the original and seperate timeline WHICH STILL EXISTS. (I don't understand what part of that is too hard to grasp.)
It's just that whenever time travel has been depicted in previous episodes/films, it *has* replaced what came before. "City on the Edge of Forever," for example. "Yesterday's Enterprise". Star Trek: First Contact. So you gotta admit, it's odd that suddenly the rules have changed.
Or have they? It's not like we're going to see any proof of this (i.e. the original timeline continuing to exist) in the film, right? And from what I hear, "Countdown" doesn't even show that.
Honestly, I can't stand this whole thing. I seem to share the same sentiments, or similar ones, of Jeffries and some others. My reasons are, I think, probably what's really bugging those of us who don't like this on a deep level. It took a while to figure out exactly how to put this all into words, but hopefully it makes sense:
Basically, the characters in the series from now on are not the same characters as in the original series. Now I have no problem with new sets of characters. The problem is that they are alternate versions of the ones we know.
Trek fans have spent decades with these people, just like we have spent decades with our families, friends, and loved ones. Of course the Trek characters are only fiction, and the point is not to try to give them equal value as those real people in our lives - this would be rather disturbing, actually. One similarity, however, is important. We love our family and friends because of all of the shared experiences we have had with them. We were there for the hard times, the good times, the funny times, the sad times, and all the other kinds of times as well. We were there for their births, funerals, marriages, etc. etc. If something happened to your best friend, or to your mother, and he or she were replaced by a clone identical in every single way except for the lack of those same experiences, not only would you not love the clone, but you would probably consider it an abomination and a tremendous offense to the memory of that person who you loved so much.
That’s what these “new” characters are to those we know and love. Not only do I have, in all honesty, less than zero concern for them, but they offend me deeply. They’re not real people, so there is quite obviously a limit here (so please do not accuse me of holding fictional characters as important as real people), but to the degree that one can care about a fictional character, I am deeply hurt and offended by these facsimiles.
Let me add one more point, which does not so much add to my argument but adds a context to it. That is, why couldn’t the franchise have been re-invigorated without changing things? The only argument I have seen from those who support the reboot is that Star Trek had grown stale and needed to be reinvigorated. That’s a perfectly reasonable stance. However, there is not a single aspect of the excitement that is surrounding this film that could not have been generated without the reboot. Have any of the small canonical changes really contributed to the film’s being highly anticipated? Was it not possible to update the visual style without changing history? Couldn’t the story be just as big, have just as big a production, and just as popular a director if it told the origins of the crew as we knew them?
Indeed, the final proof lies in the fact that the vast majority of those who are contributing to the excitement - the non-Trekkie types that so many Trek fans are so excited are beginning to care about Trek - do not even know it’s a reboot. So far as they are aware, it’s the same Trek it always was, just done bigger, better, and with more explosions and sex appeal. Yet they are still extremely excited about the film.
Thus, the biggest tragedy is that this was not in any way necessary! What is it for? What’s the point? The need?
Wow, you really really don't post here often do you?
I think everyone knows this is a reboot, and if you were a Trek fan you'd give this film a chance. You bring up things like they're different actors - of course they are. What did you expect? To bring back a bald, fat Captain Kirk playing himself as a 20 year old? No.
I think everyone that posts here IS a Trek fan, and not only a Trek fan, but a fan of the TOS series as a whole. For you to come here and bitch and whine proves the point that people really can't let go of the past and embrace something new. The old TOS is still there, it's not going anywhere, it's a very good idea to go back to the start and retell the story, there's nothing new in a TV series they can make, and theres no room for a new story with TNG, or a new cast and nobody would accept that. If you love Trek, and you want it to keep going, then this is the only option. Personally, I love Trek, and I was skeptical about this film, but the more I read the more I really want to watch this because I've heard nothing but good from the people that have watched it, and nothing but bad from the people that don't want to watch it. Who am I going to trust?
Will you stop crying if I give you your bottle back? Shit, I bet you weeped over TOS when TNG came out.
I feel like you're arguing with a different person. I never said anything about having a problem with a recast. I'd like to see a recast of the original characters. The problem I have is that these aren't the original characters. They're facsimiles. It's so hard to see Mr. Urban play a PERFECT McCoy, but realize this is not the McCoy I knew. I did not cry when TNG came out. That I had no problem with, for it tried to build on TOS and tell some interesting stories in the same universe, with those same characters from TOS having been real, historical figures to the characters of TNG. McCoy, Spock, and Scotty even interacted with this new crew, as it was the same universe, just in the future. In this case, it's not trying to build on TOS, but to redo it in the way the creators want to now. It's technically keeping the original timeline, but for all of the characters moving forward, unlike in TNG, the characters from TOS will NOT be real historical figures to the crew, or anything similar. When I sit and watch this new crew, I know that to them, the characters I remember never existed.
Iano--
I have been having a really bad feeling that that was going to happen for sometime now and wanted to be prepared for it. It really stinks, IMHO...
Thanks for preparing me.
Or you could just, you know, go visit your old friend. He's still alive after all.
It can be confusing, it's true. In Trek we've had at least:
1. Time travel that can change history (TVH, etc.)
2. Travel between parallel universes (MU episodes)
3. Time travel and travel between parallel universes (In A Mirror, Darkly)
And other such anomaly/space weirdness type stuff that I can't recall right now.
So I have no problem with the way this movie does things.
Original Trek was already dead and buried before this film came along. Enterprise killed it for TV and Nemesis for film.
Hell, DS9 lost the general or extended Trek audience all on its own, before Voyager or Enterprise ever showed up. OldTrek's been dying since the early 1990s.
That might be true, but DS9 and Voyager continued to be profitable for Paramount and are still earning a fair amount of money today. They might not have had TNG's popularity but that doesn't mean they weren't worth producing from an business point of view.
number6
Vice Admiral
Both shows were losing viewers and had to be retooled to avoid being cancelled.
So is Star Trek: Enterprise. Paramount has made a good profit off of the series - it was cancelled by UPN, a partnership between Paramount and others that Paramount Television was a supplier to but certainly did not control.
But then, hell - I understand that Paramount has made a little money off of the only Trek series cancelled after a mere three years, as well...
DS9 was threatened to be cancelled? This is news to me.
So is Star Trek: Enterprise. Paramount has made a good profit off of the series - it was cancelled by UPN, a partnership between Paramount and others that Paramount Television was a supplier to but certainly did not control.
But then, hell - I understand that Paramount has made a little money off of the only Trek series cancelled after a mere three years, as well...
Are you sure Enterprise has been profitable? An episode cost 4 million to make and they made almost a 100 of those so thats 400 million invested. I'm not sure they have made all that much return on this one yet.
number6
Vice Admiral
It didn't do so well as the only Trek on the air after the end of TNG. The show was suffering a serious ratings slump. That's why Worf was added to the cast: to bring TNG fans over to DS9.
Similar threads
